Christie,
CJTC:—The
respondent
reassessed
the
appellant
for
her
1979
and
her
1980
taxation
years
by
disallowing
claims
to
deduct
tuition
fees.
The
appellant
objected,
but
the
respondent
confirmed
his
decision
by
notifications
dated
March
12
and
September
16,
1982.
The
issue
is
whether,
on
the
facts,
the
appellant
“commuted”
to
an
educational
instituition
in
the
United
States
within
the
meaning
of
paragraph
60(g)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act.
The
paragraph
authorizes
a
taxpayer
to
deduct,
in
computing
her
income
for
a
taxation
year,
the
amount
of
any
fees
for
her
tuition
paid
to
an
educational
institution
in
the
United
States
which
provides
courses
at
a
postsecondary
school
level.
This
is
subject
to
certain
provisos
including
the
requirement
that
the
taxpayer
shall
have
resided
during
the
whole
of
the
year
in
Canada
near
the
boundary
of
Canada
and
the
United
States,
and
commuted
to
the
educational
institution.
The
pleadings
and
evidence
established
that
the
educational
institution
involved
was
the
Institute
of
Children’s
Literature
(“the
Institute”)
in
Redding
Ridge,
Connecticut.
The
respondent
denies
that
the
Institute
is
an
educational
institution
described
in
paragraph
60(g)
and
while
the
evidence
in
this
respect
might
be
regarded
as
being
somewhat
doubtful,
I
am
prepared
to
accept,
for
the
purposes
of
this
appeal,
that
the
Institute
is
within
the
description
in
the
paragraph.
The
significant
point,
however,
is
that
during
the
relevant
periods
the
appellant
resided
in
Edmonton
and
did
not
travel
to
and
fro
between
that
City
and
Redding
Ridge
for
her
education.
The
relationship
between
her
and
the
Institute
was
that
of
corresponding
student.
The
appellant’s
case
rests
upon
one
of
the
dictionary
meanings
ascribed
to
the
word
“commute”
and
particular
reference
was
made
to
the
1977
edition
of
Webster’s
New
Collegiate
Dictionary
which
at
page
228
includes
this
in
the
signification
of
commute:
“to
give
in
exchange
for
another”
and
“to
convert
(as
a
payment)
into
another
form”.
The
transmission
of
the
educational
material
between
the
Institute
and
the
appellant
for
the
fees
paid
was
said
to
consitute
the
exchange
or
conversion.
Words,
phrases,
sentences,
etc.
which
appear
in
legisla-
tion
cannot
be
construed
in
isolation.
They
must
be
viewed
in
their
entire
context
and
their
import
may
well
differ
depending
on
the
nature
of
that
environment.
The
meaning
of
commute
in
paragraph
60(g)
means
that
the
taxpayer
travels
back
and
forth
between
her
Canadian
residence
and
an
educational
institution
in
the
United
States.
The
phrase
“near
the
boundary
between
Canada
and
the
United
States”
in
the
paragraph,
itself
refutes
the
notion
that
Parliament
intended
that
the
paragraph
provide
for
deductions
in
respect
of
correspondence
courses.
The
appellant’s
reassessment
for
her
1979
taxation
year
includes
interest.
At
the
commencement
of
the
hearing,
counsel
for
the
respondent
stated
that
this
reassessment
of
interest
was
in
error
in
the
amount
of
$7.65.
The
appeal
in
respect
of
this
sum
is
allowed.
The
appellant
is
not
entitled
to
any
further
relief.
Email this Content